Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Feb 3, 2009 2:43pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Dumb question

What is difference between the SHN files and the other formats that makes it undesirable?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Finster Baby Date: Feb 3, 2009 5:56pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dumb question

Don't feel dumb alone.....I was wondering the same thing.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SoggeeJohnson Date: Feb 3, 2009 3:43pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dumb question

I think shorten was the early data compression, FLAC is a higher compression, WAV is the uncompressed data format = audio and vbr,mp3,mpu,wma,raw, etc... is a WAV file downgraded with less information, but I'm just a layman, so... that's it from me on technical jarb.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SoggeeJohnson Date: Feb 3, 2009 6:27pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dumb question

thierryhenry09-30-2004, 11:19 AM

.shn is a non-lossy format for sharing music. You don't lose audio quality. .mp3's lose a lot of quality. But .shn files are bigger, and must be converted before you can listen to them (or you can get plug-in's for your media player) so they're not as popular. Audiophiles live and die by non-lossy formats, though, so for things such as concerts, you'll see a lot of them in .shn format.

Personally, I don't think it's THAT big of a deal... Although I like .wma's more than .mp3's. .wma's sound better, and are a bit smaller than .mp3's. I usually go with a 160 kps .wma, and it sounds good enough for me.

It is THAT BIG OF A DEAL.

Single, don't even think about converting anything you have LOSELESS ALREADY into mp3's (espicially the shows I B+ped for you.)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffNoiseCollector Date: Feb 3, 2009 7:09pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dumb question

All these compression schemes will be obsolete soon, stick with WAV or AIFF for the mac folks. Redbook standard CD. If you run out of drive space open a gmail account and email yourself one song at a time and you'll never run out of space!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Feb 4, 2009 7:57am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dumb question

We're not anywhere near close to living without compression, and lossless is great. I think FLAC is stronger at this point, and is being supported in entertainment center software and in audio applications mostly via plug-ins (Adobe Audition for example).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Feb 4, 2009 7:38am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dumb question

Thanks All

I'm pretty happy as long as Trader's Little Helper can decode to WAV which it does for FLAC and SHN. Not sure about that Ogg Vorbis - that just sounds weird.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffNoiseCollector Date: Feb 6, 2009 6:50pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dumb question

Ogg vorbis is alright, flac is not that user friendly... the vorbis sounds great and you don't need no converter.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: spacedface Date: Feb 7, 2009 5:13pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dumb question

If Native Ogg Vorbis and Theora support is added in Firefox as planned...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Administrator, Curator, or StaffNoiseCollector Date: Feb 12, 2009 7:40pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dumb question

All I know is wavosaur and reaper can convert to/from it and it sounds better than mp3.

Attachment: heltermix.ogg.reapeaks

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)